However,the B12 has a real problem whether UT likes it or not they need to get to 12.UT is not leaving the B12 because of political considerations and their strong power hold over the conference.

Fox thinks they need to get into Florida for its tv market.The national championship will penalize financially those conferences that do not have league playoff and you need 12 or more schools to do that.The likely targets are FSU and Miami of the ACC.

The B10 also wants to expand.The prime targets ACC schools UVA,Ga TECH and UNC.The other target U Kansas of the B12.If these events star to happen the ACC starts to break apart to the a point where it needs replacements.The likely replacements will be from the A12,UC,UConn,USF,UCF,Navy and Temple.

also what happens with ACC and UMD law suit over 50 million dollars also has a part to play.However,I doubt this 50 million fee thing will work any better than what the BE did to keep members.Of course the ACC will get some money but not near 50 million.

We should all know that the SEC, Big Ten, and PAC 12, are the real stable conferences, meaning none of the universities in those conferences are leaving (incl. the Mizzou, Vandy, UF dream wish talk).If moving and wanted, these are the conference to be.

Agree with ctx on his point about the Big 12 and Bish. Cutter as the SEC may view the Big 12 in relation to how it may view the ACC. Some of this may have a lot to do with the Big 12 itself, past and pattern of expressions from their own schools and less entanglements comparatively.

Big 12's security hangs on the GoR and the choice primarily of one university, maybe two (UT/OU). Shall anyone there try to test it? Any revelations in the fine print of the contract? The conference itself can change it they decide to but that takes the necessary votes. For now, it holds the conference fairly solid. Neinas & Bowlby's success does not reside with great expansion, but finding stability with financial security and a new bowl deal. But as ctx reflected, 10 would not cut it in how the distribution formula can change.

The Big Ten appears to be the major conference sounding ambitious about expanding. It has come from comments from personalities of conference schools. However they are not always on the same message. The thought may be that they were successful in landing Maryland, and while the ACC has not recovered from being shaken and their TV value is comparatively less, now is the time to move to take whomever else is desired to feed the BTN into more dixieland turf.

The sec post could be seen leaning on the posturing side even supporting the ACC. From an SEC perspective and what could happen, it makes some sense. There are historical ties and rivalries between a number of SEC and ACC schools, several in shared states. This would impact thinking as to who else may try to move into the region and in what numbers. I would agree there is a difference between wanting a school and the school wanting to relinquish what they currently have.

Bishon Cutter referenced this. It does come into play, to a certain degree. Why WVU was passed over by the ACC. The purplish, culture, likeness, and so forth, some of that sorta changes: Louisville going to ACC, Mizzou in SEC. Really, Clemson and BC can't be so alike. Sure they evaluate 'fits', but the smart ones are not always so inflexible on this.

For Louisville, the interest would be for the ACC to be secure. Options and being the top priority of another major conference would not be good.

The ball may not be in the Big Ten's court. Rather, the ACCs'. They have an internal job to do if they have the fortitude and means.

Fox thinks they need to get into Florida for its tv market.The national championship will penalize financially those conferences that do not have league playoff and you need 12 or more schools to do that.The likely targets are FSU and Miami of the ACC.

Because they don't want to settle for the Interstate 4 duo of UCF and UCF. Fox, ESPN, etc., shall essentially and eventually have the power over conferences to determine each's members.It'll become more of who one is assigned to play rather than who one wants to play. Next level will be to shift schools as the networks wish for a given contract. Conferences get caught up in greed only to later dawn on them they've lost control.

The B1G defining prospects in terms of AAU criteria, that too will be incorporated in future marketing gimmicks.

The question with the SEC focuses on scheduling. Dealing with 14 has it's adjustments. The SEC has tried to do it in a manner not to exclude annual fb OOC rivalries, 5 of which involve ACC schools, so from a certain angle the inteface has certain mutal benefits. Some have been talking about moving season-ending OOC rivalries to earlier in the season. Not all fans will want to understand. Schools such Alabama and Auburn can be very fussy and stubborn about whom they play and what their division looks like and what crossovers are acceptable and when. For a conference that wants to remain at 8 fb conference games, why would 16 or more be needed, other than advancing more broadcasting revenues? 14 has to be plenty for bb and all other sports. Looking at current baseball schedules, 12 (with the divisions) seemed better as a total than 14.

When all of the realignment is done and settled, I believe there will be 4 major conferences of anywhere from 12-20 teams. I think we can all agree that the Big 10, SEC and the Pac whatever number the settle on, will be three of those. If the Pac 12 stays at 12, then I would imagine the Big 12 as the 4th survivor. However, if the Pac goes to 16 and gets Texas and TT as well as OU and Okie light, then I think the ACC somehow survives and merges with the leftovers of the Big 12.

If the conferences do grow to 16-20 teams, and conferences all start playing 9 or even 10 conference games, what is the likelihood that these conferences will push for a 13th or maybe even a 14th regular season game? IF they did, schools could still schedule enough home games to cover their costs.

SBJ article(previously posted in another thread)reporting that SEC has completed buyback of live content for about $15 million per year,or about $1 million per school.(So much for the misinformation regarding Florida and other SEC schools making millions of dollars per year in third party tv rights.)This content will be added to SEC Network which reportedly will be announced tomorrow in Atlanta.Link at http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jour ... a/SEC.aspx

SBJ article(previously posted in another thread)reporting that SEC has completed buyback of live content for about $15 million per year,or about $1 million per school.(So much for the misinformation regarding Florida and other SEC schools making millions of dollars per year in third party tv rights.)This content will be added to SEC Network which reportedly will be announced tomorrow in Atlanta.Link at http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jour ... a/SEC.aspx

This article dated July 15, 2008 states that UF gets approximately $10 million per year with Sun Sports.

So WHERE does it say in either article that Florida gets 100% of this money for live sports content?This is for a "basket"of media rights to "include' a small amount of live tv rights.Please explain why the SEC is reportedly only paying about $1million per year per school in live content buybacks?

SBJ article(previously posted in another thread)reporting that SEC has completed buyback of live content for about $15 million per year,or about $1 million per school.(So much for the misinformation regarding Florida and other SEC schools making millions of dollars per year in third party tv rights.)This content will be added to SEC Network which reportedly will be announced tomorrow in Atlanta.Link at http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Jour ... a/SEC.aspx

This article dated July 15, 2008 states that UF gets approximately $10 million per year with Sun Sports.

So WHERE does it say in either article that Florida gets 100% of this money for live sports content?This is for a "basket"of media rights to "include' a small amount of live tv rights.Please explain why the SEC is reportedly only paying about $1million per year per school in live content buybacks?

SJSUFan,thanks for reposting this old USAToday article.However,according to it,"The SEC can pull back broadcast rights if it does create its own network,but should that happen,the terms of the Sun Sports agreement could change".That is what is reportedly happening,with the SEC reported buyback of individual school tv broadcast rights,for about $1 million per school per year.Over the years,some members have posted that the individual SEC schools received Network tv money plus "third tier" tv rights money in the neighborhood of $10 million per year.Those numbers have never been confirmed.If someone has evidence to support the position that any SEC schools receive about $10 million per year in so-called "third tier"(live game) tv money please post it on this MB,preferably in the "Conference Television Money" thread.

Article out of Montgomery discussing tomorrow's scheduled SEC TV Network announcement at Noon in Atlanta.The new league TV arrangement will reportedly consolidate all live FB & BB TV game content under league control.This should/could make it easier to compare conference tv contract revenue in the future.Link at http://www.montgomeryadvertiser.com/art ... 0012/SEC-c

TSN article(previously posted in another thread)discussing today's SEC announcement that they are planning to launch the league tv network in August,2014.Their media deals with ESPN have reportedly been extended to 2034.Link at http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-footba ... ve-skipper

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum